~ Why Threefold?

Thread originally posted on the Aeclectic Tarot Forum on 22 Apr 2002, and now archived in the Forum Library.

kayne	22 Apr 2002
I am rediscovering an interest in paganism and have a few 'general' questions for you all... In Wicca they say... what ever you put out will come back threefold... I was wondering where this came from? Why not fourfold or twenty-eightfold etc? Has anyone experienced the effects of this golden rule?

Pollux	22 Apr 2002
I can say I have experienced that. I certainly have. But I think those were errors i had to make. I asked myself the same question. I don't know the answer... But my explanation is that by drawing a line, you get back a whole cube. What we do has inconceivable and ineffable consequences; I can actually see this clear as water in relations with Magic and Energies, and their exploitation... My path is so weird... I just seem to experience... P.S. I am even more curious to know the answer now

Liliana	22 Apr 2002
Cause three is a very powerful number, many things come in threes like body mind spirit, past present future, Id Ego Superego,its a long list. I think it might have been the threefold law because of the triple aspect of the Goddess, Maiden Mother and Crone, even Christians have a trinity :) The triangle is also the strongest shape (if you push on its sides its harder to break than any other shape) The tarot of the Crone site also gives the meaning of 3 to be Creation, Creativity. Synthesis. Generative power. :THP

Malachite	22 Apr 2002
Liliana...actually, thats the arch...just to be pedantic... I guess its more than twice, but not too many... I can't explain that how i want to, but I'll keep thinking about it...

Tarotbear 2	22 Apr 2002
One is a fantastic number. However one plus one creates a new and different number: two. However - 'two' is still separate 'ones'. But- one joining together with one becomes two, but one and one creating two create three from their union. Makes no sense if you think for too long. Think of it in sexual terms.

Hush	22 Apr 2002
well, there are a lot of different theories. a lot say that it is just 'fold, but three because of 3 being such a strong number etc was given - but it can come back much more or less. i think it is in cunningham's books that he talks about looking at like that, but i cant remember. also, some people say it is that if you have the INTENT to do something it will come back one fold, if you ATTEMPT it it comes back 2-fold, and if you ATTEMPT and SUCCEED then it come back threefold. when i was learning about wicca, i was told the second reason...

Tarotbear 2	22 Apr 2002
Three is a 'Biblical' number? I dunno

purplelady	22 Apr 2002
Truthfully , I wish I Could See this principle manifest More obviously in Life. I Wish I could more often See bad people or people who have done something bad get their "3 fold" or even One fold bad energy come back to them! I wish I could See the people who do good having good things come back to them consistently on a 3 fold basis! Instead , it seems like "bad things happen to good people" and people who cheat, gossip, manipulate ,step on other people, etc, get the good things! sigh! End of rant!

Rhiannon	22 Apr 2002
I'm not sure why it's 3 fold. I've also heard people say 10 fold. Doesn't really matter to me. I just don't want bad stuff back in ANY fold, so I try not to put any out there. :) As far as "bad things happen to good people". Well, that's true. But good things happen to them too. Now, I'm going to be a bit of a hypocrit here and say "The best way to realize good things in your life is to keep a journal everyday of what you're thankful for" It's a great concept. It makes you realize what you're really blessed with and makes you feel there are miracles all around you, you just don't usually see them. Do I keep one? Ummmm... no, I don't. I'm lazy. And good things happening to bad people? That's true too, but then, ( and this is not to imply that everyone there is bad) just look at Hollywood. ;) I mean, yeah... they've got tons of money. Yeah they get to date beautiful people. But they constantly get busted on drug charges or get caught drunk driving or get married and divorced in the same 6 months. Are they happy? I'm stopping now because I lost track of the original question. Rhiannon :)

Liliana	22 Apr 2002
I never said Biblical, I said we have a trinity, and I also said about a threefold Goddess andnumerous other things, mention Christianity once in context to a magick/Wicca concept and someone always has to pick on you forit hehe ;) :THP

MystiqueMoonlight	22 Apr 2002
This is my interpretation of it and I will do the best I can to make it sound as clear as possible. I. Being the divine. The concept of something but without actual materialisation or firm synthesis of conception. For example a concept of an idea without having a firm picture or solution This is the point without either parts or magnitude, just position. II. The camparison of I. for without it there is nothing to compare it to and so therefore the "point" would not be a position to begin with. In other words it would not be a point (beginning if you will) if there is no other comparison. Therefore we have the line which is II. III. This line is meaningless without measure. There is no way of telling the distant between I. and II. So in order to distinguish the concept of the differences between them we must have the surface and that is III. We now have the triangle or Triad. We are all aware of Karma (the wheel of fortune). If you apply the generalisation of the above to this you have the Threefold Law. This is my explanation of this. The Threefold Law states "Mind the Threefold Law Ye should, three times bad an' three times good". This directly applies to the numerical concept above both in the "doing" and the "receiving". Blessed be

Martin	24 Apr 2002
Hello, I personally don't believe in the three fold law. It is a very recent creation, and furthermore it is directly contrary to the hermetics underlying the Craft. Spiritual Laws are gleaned by an observation of natural processes, the material world being suffused by and affected by Spirit. Well, nowehere in nature is a three fold return apparent. The second problem I have with it is that it is completely against the principle of balance. If the point of nature is to be maintain balance, where does the extra energy come from? Surely a simple return law would be more realistic? The third problem is the implicit idea of punishment and reward. Basically put it says, do good and you get a reward (extra positive energy), do bad and you get a punishment (extra negativity). This doesn't imply that the reason to behave ethically is altruistic, it suggests you could be doing it for your own benefit. The fourth problem with all of these supposed "laws" is that they don't seem to affect everyone, only those who believe in them, which makes me believe that one may be looking for evidence to back up an accepted "truth" without being objective. I ask, if a wiccan believe they won't go to hell because they don't believe in it, by the same token, is a christian exempt from the threefold law simply because they don't believe in it? Personally, I believe that we all have free will, and that the effects of our actions should be judged before we act, and that we then take full responsibility for them. I don't believe in karma, threefold laws, return of energy etc etc. They all seem to be ways of placating the human desire to believe that the world is a fair & just place. The amount of times I have seen peoples lives take a downward spiral whilst they waited for karma to kick in, when if they hadn't been so lazy and took responsibility for their lives they wouldn't have got in such a mess! One last thing to consider. If everything is the result of an action (which a karmic world would suggest), are people who are raped responsible for it by virtue of a previous action (maybe even in a past life for those reincarnationists)? I think we all know the answer to that, Martin

faunabay	25 Apr 2002
Martin, You make good points there. Do I get the 3 fold good or bad back to me because I believe in it or because it actually is true??? I read a book a while back (can't remember which one now) that said that karma (good or bad) is not completely true....... OK I just remembered and had to go dig it up - It's Healing with the Angels by Doreen Virtue. She says "releasing karma simply means releasing false ideas, which are causing painful effects. After all, mistakes don't require punishment, they simply require correction." So she says something about you choose to believe that mistakes in a lifetime require atonement, so you actually make the bad things happen to yourself. But that you can also choose to escape from this mistaken way of thinking at anytime. And the angels (as she says) will help you at any time to release the effects of any mistakes you've made in this life or any others. I'm not sure how completely I believe this right now, but the more I work with that concept in mind, the more I seem to manifest good in my life. (shrug) Just another thought here. :)

Kiama	25 Apr 2002
Martin, I disagree with you that there is no law of return, although I agree with your point that threefold seems a little weird. I believe that the law: "Every action has an equal and opposite reaction" always applies, not just in physics, but in the world around us. It seems silly to me to have energy floating around, after being given out by somebody, and then no energy going back to that person, whether it be good or bad... To me, that isn't equilibrium. Your point about rape that you made at the end of your post does not take into account the fact that somewhere, there must be a first action to start the reaction off. In your post, you say that the rape is the reaction... But it doesn't have to be. That rape could be the initial action... Thus, we escape the same trap that Kevin Keagan feel down when he said that he thought disabled people were paying for bad karma they had in pevious lives... You do make a good point when you say that the nature of the law of return implies that we don't do ethical things 'just because' but because we are selfish, and do not want to be punished. This is a very good point, in theory, but in real life, it does not always apply. Have you never opened a door for an old lady 'just because'? Have you never resisted the urge to steal something from a shop 'Just because'..? Have you never resisted the urge to hit somebody who you were arguing with 'just because...?' You will find that the majority of people [i]do[i] take responsibility for their lives, but this still does not stop the continual flow of energy needed to balance everything out. Kiama

Martin	25 Apr 2002
The law of action & reaction is now being found by scientists to not be an absolute. This has especially been found in quantum physics. Thus negativity sent doesn't necessarily equal negativity returned. I don't dispute that energy has to regain balance, but that does not necessarily mean that it goes back to the sender, or that it must be of the same polarity. Basically the energy that is sent is neutral, the intent is what makes it seem "good" or "bad". And even these terms are relevent to our cultural frame of reference. These laws don't exist in nature, and we are a part of nature and ruled by its laws. Despite our own self-importance, we are animals, and surely if these laws of energy return were so essential for the universe then we would be seeing killer whales getting their karmic returns also? This brings me to my next point, this "good" & "bad" thing. Such a dichotomy doesn't exist except in our own minds, and this has been wrought by civilisation. So why do we assume that the universes standards of positive & negative are the same as our own? Mother nature has no problem with a rabbit letting its young die if it can't feed it, and then even eating it in some cases, yet we assume we are judged negatively by nature if did the same. The fact is that the universe doen't care. It is very conceited to believe that the whole universe has little else to do but ensure we get a punishment if we misbehave. We are a tiny part of a grand thing, our petty concerns are of little consequence. Furthermore, the exact definition of what constitutes "negative" action is so undefined, and changing depending upon culture and era, that what we might see as bad here & now, might be considered fine somewhere else tommorow. You say the rape could be the action, rather than the reaction. Well, this is not strictly true. In a karmic universe everything requires energy and an impetus, this has to come from somewhere, well for their to be that energy and impetus a previous action has to have occured to cause it. One cause will make an effect, that effect will have shifted energies, making a new cause for a new effect, and so on ad infinitum. Karma doesn't allow for free will, it is a process where one action causes an effect which will spiral onwards, forever influencing future events and increasingly limiting ones free will, until you are no more than karmas puppet. You can't isolate single instances and say these are karmic, and all others aren't, karma is a continuing process. I would disagree that many people take responsibility for their own lives. People give their free will up all the time, mainly due to laziness and an inability to accept that they wrought their own future. They give it up to other peoples ideas & beliefs, to groups, societies, books, religions, karma and even other people. It is far easier for someone else to make decisions because it requires less effort on the persons part, and when things go wrong they have a scapegoat. If people truly did take responsibility for their lives there wouldn't be half the depression and bad feeling that currntly pervades the modern world. Martin

Umbrae	25 Apr 2002
"I would disagree that many people take responsibility for their own lives. People give their free will up all the time, mainly due to laziness and an inability to accept that they wrought their own future. They give it up to other peoples ideas & beliefs, to groups, societies, books, religions, karma, and even other people. It is far easier for someone else to make decisions because it requires less effort on the person’s part, and when things go wrong they have a scapegoat. If people truly did take responsibility for their lives there wouldn't be half the depression and bad feeling that currently pervades the modern world." What a great example of taking responsibility. Failure to make a decision is a decision in itself. Sitting and doing nothing with your life, allowing others to run it for you is free will. A lack of action is free will. The beauty here is that we are not rabbits…we have a different level of conscience. Further, how can you judge actions/reactions? How can you judge rape, putting into a nice neat little box? The world is not black and white, positive, or negative. Does a mans/woman’s soul respond to the laws of physics? Does God(s). Does this mean that by scientific principals you can prove or disprove God(s)? Hmmmmm.

Kiama	25 Apr 2002
Quote: Originally posted by Martin The law of action & reaction is now being found by scientists to not be an absolute. This has especially been found in quantum physics. Quantum physics and all its connotations can co-exist with the Law of Return... There are two 'types' of physical law, the first being General Theory which is basically Newton's Laws. The second being Quantum Theory, which explains very very small and specific things, hence the title 'Quantum' It does not, however, explain the General rules, nor do the General rules explain the Quantum ones. But, science does show that the two co-exist: If only Quantum theory applies, and the general laws such as the Law of Return didn't, then nothing would have any continuity, at all, whatsoever, and even gravity would not 'work'. The same the other way round: If only General Laws applied, the scientists wouldn't be able to exaplin the actions of particles. Thus, Quantum Theory does not negate the Law of Return at all. Quote: Basically the energy that is sent is neutral, the intent is what makes it seem "good" or "bad". And even these terms are relevent to our cultural frame of reference. You make a very good point here, and I agree. It is our terms we place to the energy. I have never disputed this. Quote: These laws don't exist in nature, and we are a part of nature and ruled by its laws. Despite our own self-importance, we are animals, and surely if these laws of energy return were so essential for the universe then we would be seeing killer whales getting their karmic returns also? How do we know they don't get their energy returns? We don't know how much energy they send out, nor what energy... We don't know in their terms what happens. We are a different species, and thus our understanding of their energy returns may be limited. Just beause you don't see something happening, doen't mean its not. I mean, at the time, Evolution wasn't seen. But we see it now. Quote: This brings me to my next point, this "good" & "bad" thing. Such a dichotomy doesn't exist except in our own minds, and this has been wrought by civilisation. So why do we assume that the universes standards of positive & negative are the same as our own? Again, I wasn't disputing this. We only apply the terms 'negative and positive' after we receive the energy back. Quote: Mother nature has no problem with a rabbit letting its young die if it can't feed it, and then even eating it in some cases, yet we assume we are judged negatively by nature if did the same. Call me conceited, but I believe this is because we have evolved (At least technologially) to the point where we no longer need to survive under such harsh circumstances as the rabbit. We do not usually get into the situation here all we have to eat is our young, however, there are cases where shipwrecked survivors have eaten each other... And they did not feel as much remorse as we would if we murdered for another reason. And again, just cuz we can't see the energy being returned doesn't mean its not happening! And we aren't talking about the energy return in terms of the Universe actually thinking of punishment for what happens! We're talking about energy return, not planned justice. Quote: The fact is that the universe doen't care. I'd love to know how you know this! How can we understand the Universe in this way, when we cannot yet even fathom the whole human brain? Quote: It is very conceited to believe that the whole universe has little else to do but ensure we get a punishment if we misbehave. We are a tiny part of a grand thing, our petty concerns are of little consequence. It is not 'punishment if we misbehave' but a natural return of energy. Think of it as a bowl full of water, under a running tap. The water from the tap goes into that bowl, but at some point, water must also escape from the bowl, in order for the new water to be accommadated. The same is true of the Universe... The energy we send out goes to a place, but when it goes to that place, it must push other energy out of its original place in order to get into where it is going. Otherwise, we'd get 'saturations' of energy! We know that the whole Universe is made up of energy, so it must move around, in a continual cycle, otherwise you get say, a human with no energy cuz they've sent it all out and not had any returned, and a tree which is saturated with energy! Quote: You say the rape could be the action, rather than the reaction. Well, this is not strictly true. In a karmic universe everything requires energy and an impetus, this has to come from somewhere, well for their to be that energy and impetus a previous action has to have occured to cause it. One cause will make an effect, that effect will have shifted energies, making a new cause for a new effect, and so on ad infinitum. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but didn't you say previously that such a law didn't exist? Quote: Karma doesn't allow for free will, it is a process where one action causes an effect which will spiral onwards, forever influencing future events and increasingly limiting ones free will, until you are no more than karmas puppet. You can't isolate single instances and say these are karmic, and all others aren't, karma is a continuing process. I think we are getting confused between Karma and energy return. Whereas energy return is a natural ebb and flow of energy, karma seems to have a sense of irony, teaching you lessons with its energy return... I'm not sure I believe in this, and it is not the subject we are discussing now. And, if Karma does exist, surely you are dong what you accused us 'Law of Returners' of dong by believing in the law of return? You are saying that karma cannot exist, cuz we must have free will, but isn't this just as 'bad' as saying that we believe in the Law of Return to 'placate the human desire to believe that the Universe is a fair and just place'. Again though, you are confusing Karma with energy return. Quote: I would disagree that many people take responsibility for their own lives. People give their free will up all the time, mainly due to laziness and an inability to accept that they wrought their own future. They give it up to other peoples ideas & beliefs, to groups, societies, books, religions, karma and even other people. It is far easier for someone else to make decisions because it requires less effort on the persons part, and when things go wrong they have a scapegoat. If people truly did take responsibility for their lives there wouldn't be half the depression and bad feeling that currntly pervades the modern world. There are so many other variables nowadays that could effect the number of depressed people in the world, not just the responsibility we take for our lives. By saying this, you aren't looking at the bigger picture of modern society, and instead blaming our 'problems' on one thing. Just for the record, I have seen dozens of friends and relatives go into depression because they took responsibility for their lives, but the rest of the world said, hey, no! Stop! Don't do what you wanna do! Don't achieve that dream you've always wanted to achieve! I know, cuz I've been there. In your posts you also do not take into account the Gaia Theory which is fast becoming accepted, in light of the new evidence for it. In this theory, Lovelock discovered that the plant is a living being, cuz it regulates everything precisly.. The level of salt in the sea is 3.4% and remains so, even though we are pumping 6 tims the amount of salt into the sea as we were 100 years ago... (To name just one example) Somehow, Gaia is managing to maintain stasis in everything, in order to ensure her survival, and everything on this planet is like a 'cell' of her body, helping to regulate it. Cannot the same be said of energy? Maybe she also regulates enegy in the same way she does the levels of salt in the sea? Its interesting to think about, even if it might not be fact. Kiama

MystiqueMoonlight	26 Apr 2002
Kiama, You have just explained more elaborately my point in my earlier post on this thread..... Thank you

Martin	26 Apr 2002
"The beauty here is that we are not rabbits…we have a different level of conscience. " A law that supposedly works to ensure the balance of natural energy would apply regardless of our percieved level of consciousness. It's supposedly to do with energy balance, so why should our conjectured position in nature affect that? "Further, how can you judge actions/reactions...putting into a nice neat little box? The world is not black and white, positive, or negative." That is exactly what I said, the world isn't a black/white place, which the law of threefold return suggests. The purpose of the threefold law was bound up in the wiccan rede, it comes from the same stanza. The whole of this particular piece of "litany" basically says that don't do anything to harm others or it will come back, do good and that also comes back. I have no problem with energy return itself, it's the energy return implied in the threefold return, boomerang effect etc that imply tit for tat laws. These tit for tat returns seem to appeal for the obvious reason that on a natural level our animal selves like to have revenge (which is bound up in the popular concept of justice, rather than the more esoteric meaning of the word). As for putting things into neat boxes, that's exactly what I feel about the threefold law etc, they try to explain something as complicated and multilayered in a few simple words. This of course is appealing to the vast majority of people as it gives them a supposed understanding of the universe without actually having to examine nature to see if it really works like that. "Does a mans/woman’s soul respond to the laws of physics? Does God(s). Does this mean that by scientific principals you can prove or disprove God(s)?" Here's an interesting point, the link between science and spirituality. Witchcraft, most nature and pagan belief systems have the structure of their system in hermetic philosophy. These can be found on the Emerald Tablet of Hermes, and include the idea of the sun/father and moon/mother connection and also the belief of nature (the four elements) being tied up with the spiritual level (Spirit), ie the Mother Earth & Father Sky concept. Inherent in this is a belief that the physical world is a mirror of the spirit world, except manifested. It is through natures cycle that qwe understand the energies of the seasons etc, which we then apply spiritually, consequently the increase of the sun informs us of the increase in masculine God energye etc. This is the link between observation of the natural world and the spiritual laws/meanings/understandings we attain from this. So yes, from science (a systematic study of nature and the knowledge gained from it) we attain an understanding of deity/Spirit. The trick to take science from its core meaning, not what we percieve it to be, or what it is at this time, witchcraft itself contains a form of science, from which we ascertain certain philosophies. Spiritual law based in noe experience is completely ungrounded, the whole point of wicca, witchcraft etc are approaching the divine through the physical, as this is where direct revelations are made, not in the pages of books or the words of others. "Thus, Quantum Theory does not negate the Law of Return at all." I never said it did, I was pointing out that the threefold law/boomerang effect/action & reaction laws might not necessarily be an absolute, just as neither are quantum laws or general laws, as you yourself just pointed out. The karma/law of return thing, firstly I don't believe in either of them, I am merely pointing out the logical extension of what such a belief incurs. Karma is not the the law of ironical punishment at all, this is a modern development of it. Karma in its original sense, before altered by Buddhists, modern society and a certain percentage of pagans, meant the law of cause and effect. The very meaning of the sanskrit word is "effect", the word meaning a system of cause and effect, where the effect is a direct result of your own actions, and equally proportionate to the cause, and it is your responsibility. This is the very same as the law of return, and most of these laws have their roots in karma. It has been mentioned that we have evolved technologically beyond the level of the rabbit, this may be so but we are still animals at base, which is why we have the green man & the horned god, representations of the animal in the human. This of course we curb with what passes for civilisation in our modern times. Even now, pagans see no problem with saying we are a part of nature, but still implying we are above it because we are technologically advanced and so more evolved, thus we get special attention from deity because of this. We evolved from monkeys, we are animals. We are not set out for special mention, the same rules apply. What we see in natrure we should see in ourselves. I might point out that nature is red in tooth and claw, destruction is as important as creation, light as much as dark. So why would nature, whose very manifestation can be negative (we call it inhuman, as if the human vantage was the highest) from our viewpoints, have a specific law that would want to restrict this very behaviour? It is said the energy is not a punishment, well if you murdered someone for example and you got energy back, are you saying it will not be negative in nature, and thus neutral? If so, then your idea of energy return concurs with mine, beause I just don't think energy law is the tit for tat, eye for an eye, revenge orientated law that it is percieved to be by the majority of pagans, and the law that is presented in the threefold law stanza. I never said taking responsibility for you life gives you immunity to bad experience, if you didn't have these bad experiences you wouldn't be able to perfect the ability of thinking ahead. It is taking responsibility that allows us to evolve, and giving it up to someone else does not achieve that in the long term. We need to make our own mistakes. I must also point out I never blamed this as the root cause of all ills in modern life, I actually said there wouldn't be half the problems, which actually infers it accounts for a percentage of problems, not their entirety. Lovelocks Gaia theory is an interesting one. He himself actually stated in his third book on the subject that his theory may be "partially or wholly in error". He also went on to deny that the earth was living like a human or tree, but was actually just self-regulatory, like a "domestic iron or oven". Of course there are now being found gaping holes in his theories, but that is of little matter. He also thought the goal of no pollution was ridiculous, believing it was as harmless as bacteria in the gut. Moreover, the whole of his work had been preceeded by the Soul of the World theory, which is thousands of years older, and not open to the same problems that Lovelocks theory is. If my replies are coming across as aggressive, then it is wholly unintentional. I harbour no ill feelings just because someone else feels differently. I just feel it is of benefit to bring theories into the open, where opposition to a theory exposes it to fire, either strengthening it or destroying it, dependent upon its own merit. This of course being an appropriate method of evolving our beliefs, mine included. Love & Light Martin

Kiama	26 Apr 2002
Quote: Originally posted by Martin [b] "Thus, Quantum Theory does not negate the Law of Return at all." The karma/law of return thing, firstly I don't believe in either of them, I am merely pointing out the logical extension of what such a belief incurs. Karma is not the the law of ironical punishment at all, this is a modern development of it. Karma in its original sense, before altered by Buddhists, modern society and a certain percentage of pagans, meant the law of cause and effect. The very meaning of the sanskrit word is "effect", the word meaning a system of cause and effect, where the effect is a direct result of your own actions, and equally proportionate to the cause, and it is your responsibility. This is the very same as the law of return, and most of these laws have their roots in karma. We are not discussing karma in its original meaning though... We are discussing the values associated with it now... The theory held by some which states that we must learn our lessons, through different lives, and that karma helps us do that by giving us back what we have given out, so we learn what it is like. I suppose, however, that we will never reach an answer in this discussion to whether or not Karma is the same as energy return, as it is mosty a subjective view. *Sigh* Doesn't subjectivity just make life so difficult!? ;) Quote: Even now, pagans see no problem with saying we are a part of nature, but still implying we are above it because we are technologically advanced and so more evolved, thus we get special attention from deity because of this. I feel quite insulted by this. It has been my experience that the majority of Pagans I have met do not hold this view. (Perhaps I am lucky and have met some really great Pagans?) When I sid we are more technologically advanced than other species, I did not say that we get special attention from divinity... I was saying that we do not put ourselves in the position of that rabbit very often, cuz we have made a world for ourselves where survival of the fittest no longer applies. Quote: It is said the energy is not a punishment, well if you murdered someone for example and you got energy back, are you saying it will not be negative in nature, and thus neutral? If so, then your idea of energy return concurs with mine, beause I just don't think energy law is the tit for tat, eye for an eye, revenge orientated law that it is percieved to be by the majority of pagans, and the law that is presented in the threefold law stanza. We have reached a conclusion then! We both agree that threefold return is scientifically implausible. We both agree that energy return is neutral, and that it is only our views of the experience of that energy return that make it negative of positive. But, I again disagree with your point about what 'the majority' of Pagans think! Again, myabe its cuz I am lucky and have met Pagans who are different to 'the majority'... Quote: I must also point out I never blamed this as the root cause of all ills in modern life, I actually said there wouldn't be half the problems, which actually infers it accounts for a percentage of problems, not their entirety. Again, this is an assumption you cannot make... You cannot assume that we have more problems now than, say, 150 years ago... You cannot assume that our society has more ills than it did 1000 years ago... Which is what you were implying originally. (As an interesting side note, David Hume said we cannot assume anything! We cannot assume that our experience of the Universe is valid, or that our experiences are actually experiences! This man must've been hell to live with! "David, go tidy you room!" "But, Mother! You don't even know that the mess is really there at all!" ;) ) Quote: Lovelocks Gaia theory is an interesting one. He himself actually stated in his third book on the subject that his theory may be "partially or wholly in error". He also went on to deny that the earth was living like a human or tree, but was actually just self-regulatory, like a "domestic iron or oven". Of course there are now being found gaping holes in his theories, but that is of little matter. He also thought the goal of no pollution was ridiculous, believing it was as harmless as bacteria in the gut. Moreover, the whole of his work had been preceeded by the Soul of the World theory, which is thousands of years older, and not open to the same problems that Lovelocks theory is. Actually, there has been evidence very recently which has come to light to go some way to validating the Gaia Theory. But, it is still just a theory just like Quantum Physics, Darwin's Evolution Theory, and the Creation story of the Bible. In his most recent book, Lovelock's faith in his own theory was renewed. He ends his book with the words: "It is some comfort to know that when I die, I will join the chemisty of Gaia...." Or words to that effect! (I'm typing off-the-sleeve here, and really wish a had a couple of his books by my side right now. Actually, a book on Quantum Physics, energy return, or Karma wouldn't go amiss right now! ;) ) Quote: If my replies are coming across as aggressive, then it is wholly unintentional. I harbour no ill feelings just because someone else feels differently. I just feel it is of benefit to bring theories into the open, where opposition to a theory exposes it to fire, either strengthening it or destroying it, dependent upon its own merit. This of course being an appropriate method of evolving our beliefs, mine included. Wonderful! I agree wholeheartedly with this! (WOW! People gasp! Kiama actually agrees with someone for once!) I will never pass up an opportunity to discuss a juicy topic such as this... Some people see me as trouble-making, sh*t-stirring... But I see it as getting to grips with the Universe, and the topics thrown up by its apparant existence... I'm not off to do a Philosophy degree in September for nothing! :) Overall, I think that we have come to a fairly comfortable conclusion about energy return, it is just the finer points of its implications that we disagree on. Kiama

Martin	26 Apr 2002
"I feel quite insulted by this. It has been my experience that the majority of Pagans I have met do not hold this view. (Perhaps I am lucky and have met some really great Pagans?) " I think you have indeed been lucky to have met some great pagans. My experience has generally been of lip service to equality of humans, animals, plants etc. The only exceptions to this are a handful of individuals and the people in my coven, but then I do "choose" the people I let in! It's just too difficult to get on with things if you're constantly debating the theory behind it! No need to be insulted if you're not the one whom the cap fits! "You cannot assume that we have more problems now than, say, 150 years ago... You cannot assume that our society has more ills than it did 1000 years ago... Which is what you were implying originally." I have never assumed such a position, or even implied it. I am only talking of modern life because that is all I have direct experience of. In fact, I think we probably have the same number of problems, it's just the sphere of a persons influence has changed. We are no longer interacting in small groups, we interact globally, so although in the developed world we mainly don't have to worry about the purity of our water etc, we do gain the problems of how another countries economy might affect us etc. It comes back to the pyramid theory, with our basic needs at the bottom and the arts at the top, when we have to worry about where we are getting food from, the state of the modern art scene is more or less trivial, whereas when the bottom layers are satiated we can concern ourslves with the upper layers. The problems remain, the arena changes. "(As an interesting side note, David Hume said we cannot assume anything! We cannot assume that our experience of the Universe is valid, or that our experiences are actually experiences!" We therefore cannot assume that David Hume is correct, and so we shouldn't assume that we shouldn't assume anything! "I will never pass up an opportunity to discuss a juicy topic such as this... Some people see me as trouble-making, sh*t-stirring... But I see it as getting to grips with the Universe, and the topics thrown up by its apparant existence" It would be a very boring existence if all we ever did went unchallenged and unopposed, so I say all the more power to debate! "Overall, I think that we have come to a fairly comfortable conclusion about energy return, it is just the finer points of its implications that we disagree on." Well, we've achieved more than most can ask for, many debates unfortunately end up in mud slinging, never coming anywhere near a conclusion, even if it's merely agreeing to disagree! I should know, I've had more than mud thrown at me in my many debates! Maybe we could discuss whether energy return has any place in an ethical stance. If the energy returned is neutral, does it therefore have any direct impact on the way we carry out our lives? Maybe we could also discuss the anology of energy return being likened to a web of existence, where tapping one bit will send vibrations/energy throughout the rest of it, thus implying more than a simple two way/there and back energy return? Anyone have any thoughts? martin

kayne	26 Apr 2002
I have been following this debate and found it fasinating... I am afraid I don't know nearly enough about this subjects to contribute effectively but, Martin, I think the questions you are posing would make an excellent new thread for a new debate here in Spirituality. Why not start it? :D

Martin	26 Apr 2002
"I have been following this debate and found it fasinating... I am afraid I don't know nearly enough about this subjects to contribute effectively but, Martin, I think the questions you are posing would make an excellent new thread for a new debate here in Spirituality. Why not start it? " I can't believe you have nothing to contribute to the discussion!! But I have taken your advice and started a new thread on the question of what implications energy return has, Love & Light & Flame-Grilled Fairy Wings, Martin

Kiama	27 Apr 2002
Thus, my friends, we see what happens when two people who love playing the devil's advocate debate with each other! ;) :p :) Martin, I look forward to the next thread! Kiama

Angel Star	27 Apr 2002
I liked your interpretation on this one Rhiannon. This one is simple. Also I am very tired so if I am not making sense that is why right now. The three fold law basically you can break it down as whatever you send out comes back. There I wrote its simple its basic. As for the ranting from Purplelady I know what you mean sometimes it seems this way that the bad get away with things but personally I have seen this to seem to be true and then out of nowhere the boomerange affect kicks in. :) As far as neutrual energy now I will have to think about that one for a couple of days.

SusanAe	29 Apr 2002
Parden me folks, I wrote a response before reading the entire thread. I am now editing my response. I didn't realize there was a hot debate about "karmic law" going on. So, I'll have to dig down deep in my little self and think.... is the threefold thing really about karmic law? The law of return and all that? My response was about the three's of trinity and how touchy some people are about the names!! Karma, sigh. What I think is that we have power in our energy.. that energy when applied to will can create, or manifest on the physical plane. I also think you can erase intent, therefore you can erase cause, therefore erase effect. Those who seek control find it based on another "Law". Let me put it this way.. we are individual magicians manipulating energy, law of attraction, law of probability, laws of nature, whatever. It is not so much that I think therefore I am but I think therefore I change. When peoples lives get ripped apart by a predator it does not mean we have chosen it, or it was part of any karma payback. IT means THEY have chosen you to perform their whatever mental illness on, you were simply the mark. Right, in this the "Universe" does not care!!!!! I'm not getting "paid back" for some deed done somewhere else, on someone else!!! Rather.. it is like an innocent caught in the trap of an ambush. All I can do is gain the power to have insight, foresight and learn from hindsight. Did all the Jews that were slaughtered in World War 11 have bad "Karma"? Listen.. if it smells like dung, looks like dung.. chances are real real good... it is dung. Some "theories" just have to be proven wrong. Karma may be one of them. Only when I say! You will get yours to the universe does it have any chance of boomeranging.. because as I said.. WE are the magicians, we are the Power and we are the WILL. So mote it be. Here is my 1st post I agree about being picked on when the names for trinity come up.. jeesh. I think Cosmos, Collective unconscious and individual subconscious seem to be the most non debatable when speaking to the wide variety of spiritualists out there. What's in a name? Energy is energy, there isn't a need for the Wiccans to get defensive in Father, Son, Holy Ghost, or the Christians to get up in arms over Maiden, Mother, Crone. The three fold energy reality just plain is.. a trinity by any other name is still a rosie rose rose trinity isn't it? Multiplying out as once with intent, twice with attempt and success with three sounds to me to be a darn good explanation. Frankly there is such a thing as a universal law to cause and effect, can any magic or miracle occur without the use of law? Certainly the collective unconscious knows about threes, it's EVERYWHERE known on earth!!!! Love, Susan Ae

imperium	30 Apr 2002
It would be funny to ask Sanders or Gardner if they beleived in the law of threefold return - something tells me they would smile and laugh!

joya250	03 May 2002
just came across this in an article about acsension (from one of links Truth posted).... and thought it was pretty interesting, relating to the number 9, or rather, 3 times 3 ..... In the case of your creation, the original allotted magnetic energy signature is a figure eight, which has three points above and three points below with one that crosses in the middle, totaling the number seven. You can see that you are altering the energy flow for your creation, known as Earth, to the triple circle. The triple circle will have the magic number nine, three points for each circle times three equaling nine. Nine gives your creation greater balance and centeredness than the number seven. Such a state of centeredness is required to pull such a creation out of the level of decay or density that it has gone into in order for each species upon Earth including mankind to ascend. And so those that are ascending are altering the very nature of your creation, and in so doing, pulling your creation out of the distortion and beyond the veils of illusion that have held it captive for eons of time.

Umbrae	10 Aug 2002
Perhaps it would be beneficial to look back historically to determine who states, when and how such a law is a law. Was it Eliphas Levi? Paul Cristian? Jean-Alexandre Vaillant? Or Papus? Indeed, is it a law? Or the opinion of one who made up false or incomplete history. I think this is a question for Catboxer or JMD.

Violet Gargoyle	10 Aug 2002
....I guess now is not the to to bring up that the Five Fold Law is Right Out..... But it is an interesting point. Do you believe in the power of a threefold law, or the eye for an eye balance? Is it because of the magic of Trinities or a sort of Freudian approach to applying the Super Ego to Karma? When I mean this I mean do you believe that a single action towards a group will bring about one group reaction in return, or many singular reactions from members of said group, hence muiltiplying the effect (the domino effect) averaging out to 3? Do you count a reaction from a group of affected individuals as one reaction or many? I have had waaaaay to much Mountain Dew tonight.......

Strega	10 Aug 2002
Quote: Originally posted by kayne In Wicca they say... what ever you put out will come back threefold ... I was wondering where this came from? Why not fourfold or twenty-eightfold etc? Has anyone experienced the effects of this golden rule? "Three times bad and three times good." Why three? This is what I think: One for the intent... One for the action... One for the result...

Strega	10 Aug 2002
Quote: Originally posted by purplelady Instead, it seems like "bad things happen to good people" and people who cheat, gossip, manipulate, step on other people, etc, get the good things! I believe that everything we experience (good or bad) has a reason whose purpose is good. And although our actions may come back to us, it is there to help us grow... not to "punish" us. Just my 2 cents. :)

jmd	10 Aug 2002
Since this thread has just been brought to my attention, and my name has been mentioned, I thought I would read through it and contribute some kind of response - keeping it to the original question as much as possible. In terms of the history of the claim, I do not seem to recall seeing any references earlier than the early 20th century. This, of course, does not mean that earlier authors (which I may even have read) do not make this claim, but rather that I have never looked at this question from a historical record perspective - and I am certainly no historian. Also, whether or not karmic consequences are related to the purported principle is probably intimately connected to the question, but it seems to me that there are even more various ways in which 'karma' has been presented than the reasonably clear 'threefold return'. Let's take some examples for reflection so that my comments which follow make sense. Firstly an example from literature. Following a murder in Crime and Punishment, Dostoevski leads the reader to consider the ramifications for the poor soul of the perpetrator. Another example: my simple 'thank-you' spoken to the waitress in a busy place changes her apparent grumpiness to a smile, and an apparent change of service towards the next person. Without the need to talk of the kinds of energy discussed in physics (in which equilibrium is only claimed to apply, in any case, to closed systems), we can see that ramifications for actions have somewhat other consequences than one may even have anticipated. Whether these can be measured or quantified is probably not really the point, for its qualitative consequences are certainly threefold: each has ramifications for our own self, for our peers, and for other beings (irrespective of their spiritual development). Maybe it is this which becomes vitally important, for the nature of what comes back may be in totally different form to that which is 'sent out' - certainly I have observed that each minute positive act by others in our local supermarket has slowly transformed it to a much more pleasant place to shop. I would like to think that a minute aspect of this has been my occasional positive acts therein too! So why threefold? The (historically) original statement may have been nothing more than a literary means of communicating extremely concisely a deeper spiritual truth - irrespective as to whether its original author may have been aware of this. The returns from each of our acts certainly have consequences far deeper and more profound than any quantitative measures.

the hermit	11 Aug 2002
Quote: Originally posted by jmd So why threefold? The (historically) original statement may have been nothing more than a literary means of communicating extremely concisely a deeper spiritual truth - irrespective as to whether its original author may have been aware of this. The returns from each of our acts certainly have consequences far deeper and more profound than any quantitative measures. This has been a marvelous thread and I commend all for a civilized discussion! One small point about “threefold”… Though not in the exact form of the “Threefold Law” the concept of threefold or “things of three” is an ancient one. Martin Luther preached about threefold righteousness and justice at Wittenberg in 1518 In yoga and Buddhism there are threefold concepts, the threefold names of Brahman, the threefold world. In the Christian bible, Judaism, Islam there are threefold blessings, threefold curses. In the old testament book Ecclesiastes chapter 4 verse 12 “And if one prevail against him, two shall withstand him; and a threefold cord is not quickly broken.” The concept of three being a representation of power, strength and even deity is an old one. Many of the ancient religions have god/desses with three faces, three aspects. The Greeks and Romans believed in the power of three in blessings and curses as did the Egyptians, Babylonians, Macedonians, Assyrians, etc. The “Threefold Law” as we know it and see it stated as a karmic system of receiving rewards or justice is just a modern manifestation of an old concept, not a twentieth century invention.

Starfish	11 Aug 2002
I have enjoyed reading all of the posts in this thread. You guys have brought such insight into this discussion. I love how Strega summarized it: One for the intent... One for the action... One for the result... :T10C Starfish

Momof6	11 Aug 2002
Quote: Originally posted by kayne I am rediscovering an interest in paganism and have a few 'general' questions for you all... In Wicca they say... what ever you put out will come back threefold ... I was wondering where this came from? Why not fourfold or twenty-eightfold etc? Has anyone experienced the effects of this golden rule? Merry Meet! My craft name is Jade but I go by Momof6 here since there is another Jade here. Yes, I have experienced the law of three many times! You will also hear it said that it will come back to you tenfold or hundredfold. If you are led to see it as a different number, maybe it is for a reason. I am not one who knows numerology. I stick to the law of the three because of the triple goddess, and the moon phases...the number 3 is special to me. (hey, that rhymed! *lol*) Hugs and Bright Blessings, Momof6

Mermaid	11 Aug 2002
Quote: Originally posted by Strega I believe that everything we experience (good or bad) has a reason whose purpose is good . I agree, Strega! I think the bad experiences we have in our lives aren't a 'punishment' for something 'bad' we did. I don't believe in a higher power (or 'Law') that's just sitting there waiting for us to do something bad so it can punish us for it... I do believe that we need 'bad' experiences to grow in compassion and maturity. I'm sure we've all had the experience of going through a 'bad patch' in our lives and emerging stronger for it. I think those of us that have the tough lessons in this life are given them because God/dess thinks we're ready for them, and will ultimately benefit from them. I guess what I'm trying to say is that I think we're being guided ... not punished.

Laurel	12 Aug 2002
I've always considered "threefold" in this context to be more allusion than a concrete absolute that related in general to the respect trinities are given in Wicca (triple Goddess, etc). The idea that you get a -lot- of self pain for causing pain to others. By coincidence perhaps, it was written in the Code of Assura (1075 BCE) II.8: If a man meddle with the field of his neighbor, they shall convict him. Threefold shall he restore. One of his fingers they shall cut off, a hundred blows they shall inflict upon him, one month of days he shall do the king's work. Laurel

the hermit	12 Aug 2002
Quote: Originally posted by Laurel I've always considered "threefold" in this context to be more allusion than a concrete absolute that related in general to the respect trinities are given in Wicca (triple Goddess, etc). The idea that you get a -lot- of self pain for causing pain to others. By coincidence perhaps, it was written in the Code of Assura (1075 BCE) II.8: If a man meddle with the field of his neighbor, they shall convict him. Threefold shall he restore. One of his fingers they shall cut off, a hundred blows they shall inflict upon him, one month of days he shall do the king's work. Laurel Laurel, to a point I agree with you that the three-fold idea of justice is perhaps less an absolute than some might say, but I don't think the idea is a coincidence at all. As I wrote earlier in this thread, and as you have noted, there are many sources that show the three-fold idea of justice is an ancient concept. It may be unclear as to the actual "starting point" of the concept, but it has been an accepted one for three or four millennia at least, if not longer.

jmd	13 Aug 2002
I suppose that in my earlier post I was really addressing the original question of the very first post, rather than general threefoldness. In that first post, the basis for the question is the comment that: In Wicca they say... what ever you put out will come back threefold... Has has been mentioned, threefold consequences are ancient. Apart from discussion in the code of Assura, which I wasn't aware of, threefold legal consequences were also mentioned in ancient Greece. Also, as rightly pointed out by the hermit, the very notion of threefoldness is an ancient one, found in numerous forms. The question, however, is why is it that in Wicca it is claimed that whatever is released will return, specifically, thrice or threefold ? My earlier response that references do not seem to predate the early 20th century are with regards to the specifics. However, as is very useful, one should also go beyond these and seek to understand the spiritual principle at play... Here one can discuss whether the threefoldness is one of quantitative or qualitative return. With any release of action, there will certainly be consequences for oneself upon one's doing, one's feelings, and one's thoughts!

Laurel	13 Aug 2002
Quote: Originally posted by jmd Here one can discuss whether the threefoldness is one of quantitative or qualitative return. With any release of action, there will certainly be consequences for oneself upon one's doing, one's feelings, and one's thoughts! [/b] It seems like we all agree that there are consequences for any action. If I have followed the thread correctly (and my apologies to all if I have not), we seem to all have different points of view regarding measuring quantitative/qualitative returns and whether or not karma has a factor to play. Like Martin, I can't say that I believe in the Threefold Law, personally. Some people out there do get away with murder, literal and otherwise. Sociopaths and others will ~never~ feel guilt or shame for reprehensible acts against other human beings. But I'm not a sociopath. I'm a practicing magician and more importantly, I'm a self-aware human being who believes that I'm accountable for my actions. If I deliberately harm someone (regardless of my intent), I will certainly feel guilt and shame and feel like I should make restitution that satisfies all parties involved. Regardless of what else happens, I'll certainly punish myself on a conscious and unconscious level until the injustice has been fixed. I don't need fear God or "bad karma", and any external repercussions are synchronistic and based on my action itself rather than karmic in nature. On the other hand, I don't see the harm in believing in the Threefold Law and respect those that do. I'd certainly rather be surrounded by people who think their good and bad actions have direct consequences than be in a room of sociopaths. :) Laurel

the hermit	13 Aug 2002
Quote: Originally posted by jmd I suppose that in my earlier post I was really addressing the original question of the very first post, rather than general threefoldness. In that first post, the basis for the question is the comment that: In Wicca they say... what ever you put out will come back threefold... Has has been mentioned, threefold consequences are ancient. Apart from discussion in the code of Assura, which I wasn't aware of, threefold legal consequences were also mentioned in ancient Greece. Also, as rightly pointed out by the hermit, the very notion of threefoldness is an ancient one, found in numerous forms. The question, however, is why is it that in Wicca it is claimed that whatever is released will return, specifically, thrice or threefold ? I posted the ancient references because I felt that is where the three-fold concept in Wicca comes from. Without trying to start a debate about when Wicca originated, the fact that extensive writing on the subject wasn't generated until the 20 century basically precludes accurately dating the concept inception within Wicca prior to that. But, at the same time, it is natural to understand that Wicca was and is influenced by the beliefs around it, just as all other religious systems are. Since the three-fold justice concept has been around for so long, both in writing and in verbal folklore, it seems another understanding would be that it was assimilated into Wicca just as it was assimilated into the other belief systems. Whether it truly describes justice in the world or simply represents the desired ideal isn't germane. Belief in a balance of justice and punishment is simply a long standing human dream. So where did the Wiccan concept of three-fold justice come from? The same place that seems to have generated the wrath of the gods, the flood stories, virgin births, epic journeys and great battles against overwhelming enemies that are found within and shared by so many of our world religions… our folklore.

zorya	13 Aug 2002
i found a website that attributes the use of the threefold law in modern wicca, to the gardnerian book of shadows. in a section about second degree initiation circa 1949, the three fold law is insinuated. "Thou hast obeyed the Law. But mark well, when thou receivest good, so equally art bound to return good threefold." here's a link to the website; http://www.waningmoon.com/ethics/3fl-7.shtml

SusanAe	24 Aug 2002
Hey.... I fell in love with the infinity symbol and how the points created the balances of threes... the 9 being the fullness. I describe time within the infinity loop, the altar being in the cross, or the point zero.. time moves this way for my lineal understanding and application. 333333333333333333333333333333333333333333 fold I ask ... ? Is it truth? I sure do think there is something to the threes in the transmutation of power... we strive to learn the secrets and put this cosmos together in little pieces at a time! So fun! Karma is only about those people who has the transmigration of soul... the evolvement of soul, that from the Indiana Jones Well of the Souls they return and they have made decisions about evolvment and balancing. Yuch for me, althought I do think that the soul is imperishable. Or, lets just agree I suspect it is imperishable, and even may be evolving in to a greater consciousness. Edgar Cayce.. amazing. We as the creators.. who can shape energy and manifest our will as the unwitting magicians.. feel the law although we may not be able to prove it. Hence three stuff. Jeesh, I'm boring myself.. sorry. Love this thread baybeeessssss Susan Ae

The ~ Why Threefold? thread was originally posted on 22 Apr 2002 in the Spirituality board, and is now archived in the Forum Library. Read the active threads in Spirituality, or read more archived threads.